The Court of Appeal has reserved ruling on the appeal filed by Chief Olisah Metuh, the National Publicity Secretary of Peoples Democratic Party against the continuation of his trial by the Federal High Court, Abuja.

In the appeal, Metuh is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling of Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja which held that he had a case to answer on the seven count charges of criminal breach of trust, money laundering and corruption brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. Destra Investment, a company solely owned by the PDP chief which is the second defendant in the case at the Appeal Court is also appealing the judgment. Justice Okon had dismissed the no case submission made by Metuh’s counsel after the prosecution had closed it case and ordered the defendant to call his witnesses. When the appeal came up for hearing on Thursday, Sylvester Tahir, counsel for the first respondent in the case which is the Federal Government had informed the court that he had filed a notice of preliminary objection to the suit.

Tahir, who contented that the notice of appeal filed by the appellant is grossly incompetent. This, according to him is because the appellant ought to have sought the permission of the trial court and leave of the appellate court before filing it since the appeal is on an interlocutory judgment.

He also argued that in making case for the appeal, the appellant did not rely just on law but also on facts, a mistake which he said has irreparably damaged his case. He asked the court to dismiss the appeal for lack of merit and sustain the ruling of the trial court on the no case submission: “The grounds of appeal are not purely grounds of law. They are grounds of law and facts and we therefore urge that the appeal and all the grounds therein be struck out.”

In his response, Onyechi Ikpeazu, counsel to the second respondent however urged the court to dismiss the objection of the the first respondent, arguing that all the grounds of appeal are grounds of law alone and not with the trial.

While supporting the argument, Tochukwu Onwugbufor, (SAN) counsel to the second appellant the law does not distinguish between interlocutory and final appeal. According to him, what the law says is that once the appeal is based on law, there can be n appeal. Onwugbufor therefore asked the court to set aside the ruling of the High Court and hold that the prosecution did not make out a prima facie case against his client said. He therefore urged the court to allow the appeal.

Justice Abdul Aboki who led a panel of three justices of the appellate court who presided over the hearing of the appeal sid the date for delivery of judgment will be communicated to the counsels in the matter.